Schrader on the deficitRegarding Rep. Kurt Schrader's Aug. 21 opinion column, "A chance for change: The deficit committee must go past $1.5 trillion": Is my congressman, for whom I spent many hours campaigning, moving to the dark side? Should we now call him Darth Schrader? He states that focusing on eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy is a nonstarter with his Republican colleagues. Analysis shows that the Bush tax cuts and the two wars are major contributors to the horrible financial quandary the federal government is in.

Perhaps he is embracing the Republican propaganda that tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs despite evidence to the contrary, or perhaps he is following the lead of our commander-in-chief when it comes to negotiations.

VIDYA KALE Lake Oswego

*****

Just the layout of your Aug. 21 Commentary page could not have made the argument clearer: Warren Buffett presenting the logic of taxing the very wealthy more, while pseudo-Democrat Rep. Kurt Schrader seemingly agreeing with the Republicans that even modest reforms "focusing on eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy ... is a total non-starter."

Buffett makes a cogent defense that "my friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress," while Schrader is giving away the store even before opening hours. If Schrader is what now passes for a Democrat, then progressives have to dig in their heels from the outset if we are to salvage anything that remains of a balanced approach to tax policy.

Every U.S. citizen should rejoice in Buffett's message while refusing to drink the Kool-Aid presented by Schrader that the U.S. economy is "actually in very good shape." If bank and Big Business profits are to be the measure of our prosperity, then Schrader hasn't been visiting small-town Oregon, but has been kidnapped by Washington, D.C., and all it represents.

RICHARD A. MEGANCK Silverton

*****

Sunday's commentary by Rep. Kurt Schrader contained some interesting observations, i.e., "the world's economy, especially America's, is actually in very good shape" because banks have solid balance sheets, businesses have excellent earnings and there is plenty of investment cash.

Unfortunately for most of us, the banks' "solid balance sheets" have not led to lending nor paying decent interest rates, but only to finding myriad new fees to assess their customers; businesses are not using their "excellent earnings" to grow their businesses and hire American workers; and the people with "plenty of cash to invest" include only the upper middle class and the wealthy.

The bottom line is that the economy only looks to be in good shape if you are at the top of the economic scale.

LYNNE BOWEN Salem

*****

Congressman Kurt Schrader's column calling for entitlement reform and tax code reform is a breath of fresh air. Unlike most Democrats, who prefer to demagogue on the issue of taxes and making Social Security and Medicare solvent for future generations, Schrader is essentially taking the same pragmatic approach advocated by Republican House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan.

While Schrader and most Democrats may disagree with some of the specifics of Ryan's plan, which was approved by the House and then immediately rejected by the Senate and President Obama, they offered nothing as an alternative. Why aren't moderate, pragmatic Democrats such as Schrader putting forth their own plan and working with Ryan to forge an agreement that will put entitlement programs on a path to solvency and eliminate all special interest tax breaks from the tax code?

JOHN LOWRY Southeast Portland

We're all investors Regarding "Taxes and 'shared sacrifice': It's time to stop coddling the super-rich" (Aug. 21): I am glad Warren Buffett and his mega-rich friends are willing to contribute more to the greater good, but the tide is turning. Government has its place, and maybe has taken up root in far too many places, at far too great a cost -- a cost that the American taxpaying public is no longer willing or able to pay.

The nonprofit sector has been growing even during this continued recession. If everyone had a chance to vote their taxes $10 at a time (like "Text for Haiti"), maybe we could see what the nation's priorities are in real time. I would like to see my kids and their kids be able to start with a clean slate and not continue to pay off Grandma's retirement or Grandma's debt to build electric vehicles.

Entrepreneurs like Buffett invest in the great new thing so that the government does not have to. Meanwhile, once a month, if you have the means, decide which nonprofit deserves your $10 this month and send it a donation. The federal government cannot do it all, and has been doing far too much for too long.

COURTNEY BROOKS Hillsboro

Stalemate politics In "America's political paralysis: It's a draw, a deadlock, a freeze. Agreed?" (Aug. 21), D.J. Tice asks, "Why are we so closely divided in our time?" I have often wondered why so many elections are so close. Here's my theory:

As a result of advances in political polling, politicians know what positions will preserve their 51 percent majority. Just as important, so do their supporters. Behind the scenes, a politician can tell supporters, "In order to be re-elected I need to move this far away from your position." The supporters can check this information. If they want their politician to be re-elected, they will allow that move.

But supporters will only allow what it takes to get that 51 percent. They'll allow politicians to play right up to the line, but no further. If a politician says, "I can get you 75 percent of what you want," supporters can reply, "No, our polls show that you can get us 90 percent of what we want and still be re-elected."